greeney2 wrote:You have your own problems to solve in Australia! Gun control did not solve them.

AUSTRALIA: MORE VIOLENT CRIME DESPITE GUN BAN

April 13, 2009

It is a common fantasy that gun bans make society safer. In 2002 -- five years after enacting its gun ban -- the Australian Bureau of Criminology acknowledged there is no correlation between gun control and the use of firearms in violent crime. In fact, the percent of murders committed with a firearm was the highest it had ever been in 2006 (16.3 percent), says the D.C. Examiner.

Even Australia's Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research acknowledges that the gun ban had no significant impact on the amount of gun-involved crime:

Between 1995 and 2007, Australia saw a 31.9 percent decrease; without a gun ban, America's rate dropped 31.7 percent.During the same time period, all other violent crime indices increased in Australia: assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.Sexual assault -- Australia's equivalent term for rape -- increased 29.9 percent.Overall, Australia's violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.At the same time, U.S. violent crime decreased 31.8 percent: rape dropped 19.2 percent; robbery decreased 33.2 percent; aggravated assault dropped 32.2 percent.Australian women are now raped over three times as often as American women.While this doesn't prove that more guns would impact crime rates, it does prove that gun control is a flawed policy. Furthermore, this highlights the most important point: gun banners promote failed policy regardless of the consequences to the people who must live with them, says the Examiner.

Rape is rape, forced sexual intercourse without consent. ...... where as sexual assault is a large & more varied rage of crimes. Sexual assault is more like second degree rape, & can be anything from slapping a co worker on the arse, to trying to kiss or fondle a person at a bar while you where drunk.

ERGO ....... Sexual assault is a far cry from Rape.

So it is very clear the author of this story has fiddled with the facts to create a bias, in the hope of pushing their own agenda.

But the facts are the facts. Gun crime is down in Australia because the Australian people & the Australian Government banned all assault weapons & semi automatic weapons after the Port Arthur

Also, Australia's overall rise in crime is on par with the rest of the world. & has little to do with the actual rise in crime & more to do with the fact that the Australian government like other governments around the world have passed laws & criminalized more & more activity's.

Example ......

Take a look at the crime figure's of the 1900 - 1950 ....... Crime was very low back then.Not because crime was not around, but because crime cartels where not illegal until much latter, as was the case with many things we would consider a crime today.

Example ..... Drugs like opium's, heroin, cocaine marijuana ..... beating a woman or Beating & killing your black slave was not a crime. child abuse went on with impunity ..... Drink driving was not even a crime. running a red light, parking for days with no need for a parking permit. .....

So forth so on ect ect.

crime has gone up' not because crime is on the rise. But because governments criminalize more & more activity's every year.

greeney2 wrote:You have your own problems to solve in Australia! Gun control did not solve them.

AUSTRALIA: MORE VIOLENT CRIME DESPITE GUN BAN

April 13, 2009

It is a common fantasy that gun bans make society safer. In 2002 -- five years after enacting its gun ban -- the Australian Bureau of Criminology acknowledged there is no correlation between gun control and the use of firearms in violent crime. In fact, the percent of murders committed with a firearm was the highest it had ever been in 2006 (16.3 percent), says the D.C. Examiner.

Even Australia's Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research acknowledges that the gun ban had no significant impact on the amount of gun-involved crime:

Between 1995 and 2007, Australia saw a 31.9 percent decrease; without a gun ban, America's rate dropped 31.7 percent.During the same time period, all other violent crime indices increased in Australia: assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.Sexual assault -- Australia's equivalent term for rape -- increased 29.9 percent.Overall, Australia's violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.At the same time, U.S. violent crime decreased 31.8 percent: rape dropped 19.2 percent; robbery decreased 33.2 percent; aggravated assault dropped 32.2 percent.Australian women are now raped over three times as often as American women.While this doesn't prove that more guns would impact crime rates, it does prove that gun control is a flawed policy. Furthermore, this highlights the most important point: gun banners promote failed policy regardless of the consequences to the people who must live with them, says the Examiner.

My position on this was ....gun control has stopped shooting spree killings in Australia ...Since 1997 there has not been a single act of this...Most of us don't sleep with a gun either .The gun control laws were reflected apon because of a shooting spree and Australia had had enough .Now the policy has worked it is one step ahead of a person who can simply grab his rifle when he has had a sh*t of a day and start shootin .

greeney2 wrote:Heartbreaking, what have we come to in this world? Every time it happens, nobody could see it coming. What is common denominator with all of these things? Why does this never happen in the worst areas to live in, it is always in the most unsuspected places, and nicest places to live in.

Prescribed psychoactive medication. That's what the common denominator is. The media is shy to say it because such pharmaceuticals are a massive money-maker. Jobs are given to otherwise useless members of society, and they call them 'clinical psychologists.'

Clinical psychology is a scam. When psychoactive pharmaceuticals are taken by someone, their brains go through changes - irreversible in most cases. Common and expected deletarious side-effects of the toxic prescribed mind-benders include suicide and paradoxical behaviour. This means a normally mild-mannered and gentle soul can snap and become an aggressive psychotic monster impervious to any reasoning because the person affected by the psychoactive drugs cannot be relied on to possess a functioning conscience. People on long-term meds start out with a few pills and the dose increases. Then whether it be through diet, a traumatic experience or suggestions from perceived 'doctors', the trance turns to unmoderated mayhem of a mind untethered by any rules because their objective is to achieve whatever their drug-damaged brain dreams up for them. People on anti-depressants are highly susceptible to suggestion.

Take a look at past cases of bizzarre murders and you'll see. Often the first few reports of an event such as this will mention the fact the alleged perp was diagnosed with a 'mental' illness. - That's telling you he/she was on psychoactive drugs prescribed by people authorised to do so by the government.

I would advise anyone thinking of taking anything psychoactive to ditch the plan. Anyone taking the stuff needs to stop... Cold turkey is best because it may help to avoid the mind from developing a tolerance for a minimum amount. (Like trying to quit smoking by cutting down - it doesn't work). But it is best if the quitter has a supportive family around them until they can be relied on to function acceptably.

*

The ptb obviously haven't got their fairy story about this incident straightened out enough yet. There are many conflicting stories, and I'm relying more on eye-witness accounts more than the lamestream press for truthful tid-bits which help to connect the dots.

The only way to prevent nuts like this from creating havoc is a long process which starts with removing the incumbant mobsters in government seats and take the money out of politics - fat chance indeed!

Obama's handlers have naturally been frantically tweaking their media whores' accounts to further the plan of disarming the people. THEY know well how easily women and emasculated Americans can be swayed and convinced through shocking events such as this shooting in Conneticut ... may commonsense prevail.

*

On one side we have plenty of accounts of the police acting like Rambo taking steroids - shooting anything they can for the slightest of reasons - mob beatings by feral cops and violent arrests of people observing them. On the other there is a growing mass of people mentally impaired through a plethora of prescribed pharmaceuticals slowly losing their ability to rely on their own senses who can snap, and then there's no stopping them through any reason.

They're a ticking time bomb. Oftentimes the person slowly being maimed through those prescribed psychoactive pharmaceuticals will become too dodgy to allow to remain in contact with the general public and get put in the Happy House on the hill - and sort of fade away and die. They are the lucky ones. Nothing much else to do with people who have been on prescribed psychoactive meds other than to eventually isolate them because they usually turn out to be permanently damaged goods.

capricorn wrote:What about Timothy McVeigh? He didn't use 1 single gun. In fact, he used something easily acquired by the everyday man. However magnitude of his destruction makes this recent shooting look like minor event.

The truth of the matter is that a psychopath will take any means necessary to kill or cause pain and suffering regardless of what weapons he has access to.

if we explored the topic ( shooting spree ) ,maybe we could get to the nitty gritty ,why are we all of a sudden talking about BOMBS ...These kids weren't killed by a bomb ,if any nutter can shoot his mama and steal her guns ,then what will stop teh next one from doing it.Iv'e noticed taht gun lovers automatically deny that any gun is a problem , when their love for guns is under the spotlight after such a tragedy,but then i think they can't defend really the actions of owning such weapons by josleling around the arguement and putting up comparisons that arent relevant to shooting sprees .In china a man tried to kill 22 kids with a knife ,he got 22 with it ,but all lived ,so if comparisons should be relevant then i think all amercians should swap guns for knives maybe.

Again your own country stated "gun control had no impact". YOU just have not had a shooting spree yet since the 1997 insodent, but you obviously still have the guns within your country to perpetrate it with, since the statistics have not impacted other crimes. It is not going to detour a mentally deranged mind either. I would like to know the details of how your gun control was put in place, after this 1997 spree. what is and is not allowed, how they enacted it, and how it affected guns already owned, etc. etc.

Take all the legal guns off the streets and out of homes that meet the criteria for automatic military assault weapons, and you could still have the same results with any number of hunting weapons. These modern assault weapons are registered, but how can you get them out of the underworld of gangs and crime, that have arsenals of them snuck into the country, or are stolen? You can't begin to imagine how many guns are in this world that are not registered. They range from antiques to military souvenirs of many wars. There have been just as many mass murders, and shooting sprees, done with what anyone would call a hunting rifle or bird hunting shotgun. These things have happened in the USA, Australia, Germany, Scotland, Finland, Norway.

capricorn wrote:guns will be blamed for this incident. Not the psychopath behind them.

And what is ultimately behind the psychopath?

I don't know the details of the suspect in this case but I believe everyone has a breaking point and to be pushed passed it can lead to 'psychopathic' behavior in the otherwise normal-functioning person.

Contact Us.

This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. we believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed an interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.